Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Commercial courts act

M/S DHANBAD FUELS PRIVATE LIMITED versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR

Section 12A is mandatory, but the consequence of rejection of plaint for non-compliance with s.12A is prospectively applicable from 20.08.2022; suits instituted before that date (and not falling within specified exceptions) cannot be summarily rejected for non-compliance but, if an objection is raised or parties express intent to mediate, the court may keep the suit in abeyance and refer the parties to time-bound mediation under s.12A, the PIMS Rules and applicable SOP; suits contemplating urgent interim relief are excepted where such relief is 'contemplable' from plaintiff’s standpoint.

Source excerpt

  • Pre-institution mediation
  • Rejection of plaint
  • Order vii rule 11 cpc
  • Prospective overruling
  • Urgent interim relief
  • Lex non cogit ad impossibilia
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

M/S. PATIL AUTOMATION PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS. versus RAKHEJA ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED

Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (as inserted by the 2018 amendment) is mandatory for suits that do not contemplate urgent interim relief; a suit instituted in contravention must result in rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC (the court may do so suo motu); this rule is given prospective effect from 20.08.2022 with specified exceptions set out in the judgment.

Source excerpt

  • Section 12a of the commercial courts act (pre-institution mediation)
  • Order vii rule 11 cpc (rejection of plaint)
  • Section 80 cpc (pre-institution notice)
  • Limitation act (exclusion of mediation period)
  • Prospective operation of judicial decisions
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

HEMANTHA KUMAR versus R. MAHADEVAIAH & ORS.

The High Court erred in setting aside the consent decree passed by the Lok Adalat on the basis of prima facie suspicion arising solely from the trial court's referral to Lok Adalat; referral to Lok Adalat does not, by itself, establish fraud or undermine the genuineness of a consent decree where the application under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC was filed and the parties and their advocates appeared and sought the decree. The consent decree is restored.

Source excerpt

  • Order xxiii rule 3 cpc
  • Consent decree
  • Lok adalat
  • Specific performance
  • Fraud allegation
Read case analysis
Legal services authorities act 1987

CANARA BANK versus G S JAYARAMA

The Supreme Court held that conciliation proceedings under Section 22-C are mandatory and a Permanent Lok Adalat has adjudicatory powers under Chapter VI-A only after it has attempted conciliation and the parties fail to reach an agreement; because the Permanent Lok Adalat in the present case did not indicate any attempt to propose terms of settlement and proceeded to decide the dispute with absent parties, its award was set aside.

Source excerpt

  • Section 22-c (pre-litigation conciliation and settlement)
  • Adjudicatory jurisdiction of permanent lok adalat
  • Public utility services
  • Finality of awards (section 22-e)
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

K. SRINIVASAPPA & ORS. versus M. MALLAMMA & ORS.

The High Court's order recalling the compromise recorded by the Lok Adalat was set aside because the High Court failed to give reasons and did not deal with the Lok Adalat's findings; an award of a Lok Adalat is equivalent to a civil court decree and final, and allegations of fraud to set aside such a compromise must be strictly and conclusively proved, which was not done in this case; therefore the Lok Adalat order dated 07.07.2012 is restored.

Source excerpt

  • Compromise decree
  • Lok adalat award
  • Fraud in obtaining consent
  • Finality of settlements
  • Order xxiii rule 3 cpc
  • Section 21 legal services authorities act, 1987
Read case analysis
Land acquisition

NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (NOIDA) versus YUNUS & ORS.

An award passed by a Lok Adalat under s.20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 cannot form the basis for redetermination of compensation under s.28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 because s.28A requires an adjudicatory award passed by the Court under Part III of the Land Acquisition Act; the deeming fiction in s.21 of the 1987 Act is confined to making a Lok Adalat award enforceable as a decree and does not convert non-adjudicatory Lok Adalat compromises into Court awards for the purposes of s.28A.

Source excerpt

  • Lok adalat jurisdiction
  • Section 28a redetermination
  • Deeming fiction (award as decree)
  • Estoppel
  • Enforceability of lok adalat awards
Read case analysis
Legal services authorities act, 1987

ESTATE OFFICER versus COLONEL H.V. MANKOTIA (RETIRED)

The Lok Adalat's jurisdiction is limited to facilitating and recording compromise or settlement; if no compromise/settlement is arrived at, the Lok Adalat must return the record to the referring court and has no jurisdiction to decide the matter on merits. Therefore the Lok Adalat's order dismissing the writ petition on merits was without jurisdiction and was quashed, and the matter was remanded to the High Court for decision on merits in accordance with law.

Source excerpt

  • Lok adalat jurisdiction
  • Compromise and settlement
  • Referral of cases to lok adalat
  • Remand to court
Read case analysis
Civil procedure

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR GENERAL versus M.C. SUBRAMANIAM AND ORS.

Section 89 CPC and Section 69-A of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1955 must be interpreted purposively and liberally to cover all methods of out-of-court dispute settlement that the Court subsequently finds to have been legally arrived at, and therefore a party who privately settles and withdraws the appeal is entitled to refund of court fees; SLPs dismissed and High Court order directing refund upheld.

Source excerpt

  • Section 89 cpc
  • Section 69-a tamil nadu court fees and suit valuation act, 1955
  • Refund of court fees
  • Purposive interpretation
  • Out-of-court settlement
  • Mediation
Read case analysis
Criminal procedure

SALEEM AHMED versus STATE & ANR.

Because the parties amicably settled the demand in Lok Adalat by an award recorded as full and final satisfaction and the appellant paid and the award was accepted, there was no subsisting cause of action to warrant registration of FIR No.548/2015; filing of the FIR after the award was unlawful and the FIR is to be quashed.

Source excerpt

  • Quashing of fir
  • Lok adalat award
  • Settlement/compromise
  • Section 482 crpc
  • Section 135 electricity act
  • Section 152 electricity act
Read case analysis
Alternative dispute resolution

MADHYA PRADESH STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY versus PRATEEK JAIN & ANR.

Even when a case is decided/settled in Lok Adalat, the requirement of following the guidelines established in Damodar S. Prabhu for the imposition of costs while permitting compounding of offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 should normally not be dispensed with. However, the Court retains discretion to reduce or waive such costs in appropriate cases, when justified by specific facts and circumstances, and reasons are recorded in writing. The practice of sending already settled matters to Lok Adalats merely for statistical purposes is discouraged.

Source excerpt

  • Lok adalats
  • Compounding of offences
  • Dishonour of cheque
  • Guidelines for compounding
  • Costs in compounding
  • Negotiable instruments act
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.